DP 425 
.E5 
Copy 1 



Conservation Resources 
Lig-Free® Type I 
Ph 8.5, Buffered 



Dfl 425 
.E5 
Copy 1 



THIRD EDITION. 



England's Eleven Years' 



#« 



Government under the 
Single-Chamber System. 



From 1649 to 1660. 



BY 

OBLON GATA. 



(Entered at Stationers' Hall.) 



PRICE ONE PENNY. 



LONDON I 

Henry J. Drane, Farringdon Street. E.C. 



>F5 



This little Pamphlet is written as a gentle 
protest against the wilful travesty of 
historical characters to suit political or 
other exigencies. 



Part I. 

It is common school-boy knowledge that this country was 
ruled under a single-chamber system for a period exceeding 
eleven years — from February 6th, 1649, to April, 1660. 

At two o'clock in the afternoon of January 30th, 1649, 
Charles's head fell at one blow from the executioner's axe, 
and he had paid the full penalty for being a traitor, tyrant, 
and murderer. Never in our history did events move so 
rapidly as they did in the next six weeks, a period in which 
was initiated the embryo of a government which was so soon 
to expand into a colossal structure that easily out-tyrannised 
any acts of tyranny perpetrated by Charles himself. Two 
days after, February 1st, the remnant (the faithful fifty- 
three) of the Commons representing the soldiery, made legal 
the outrageous act of Colonel Pride — perpetrated seven weeks 
previously — by which 140 members of opposite political views 
were forcibly ejected from the House so as to ensure a unani- 
mous vote. On February 6th, the House of Lords was 
abolished, and on the next day, February 7th, the Office of 
the Crown shared the same fate. Of course all this was done 
in the name of legality and liberty. We see the most illegal 
of all our Parliaments, the faithful fifty-three, constituting 
itself the supreme authority in the country, and taking for its 
motto : " Liberty, Liberty. The people are the origin of all 
just power. Que sa voix est la voix de Dieu. Liberty, 
Liberty" — and so on. 



These f ramers of the constitution inspired of liberty worked 
well. They became benevolent. A few of the members ex- 
cluded on December 6th were allowed to take their seats on 
condition they were "good boys" in the future. They had 
also to sign a declaration that they quite agreed with what 
had been done during their enforced "holiday"; further, 
writs were even issued for new elections, but of course only to 
those constituencies which would return a republican member 
with certainty. On February 15th, Parliament appointed an 
executive Council of State consisting of 41 members, with 
Bradshaw as president and John Milton as Foreign Secre- 
tary. On May 19th the consummation of their labours was 
attained, and England was proclaimed a Commonwealth and 
Free State. For the present we pass over the murders at 
Drogheda, September nth, and Wexford, October 12th, the 
battle of Dunbar, September 3rd, 1650, and the battle of 
Worcester, September 3rd, 1651. It would be extremely in- 
teresting if it could be definitely ascertained what were Crom- 
well's views on the burning subject of the day, namely Tariff 
Reform. The probability is that he cared very little for such 
a trifling topic, he appears to have been well pleased with the 
grant allowed him — ^6,500 a year, with the use of Hampton 
Court thrown in as a residential villa — probably the topic of 
"absolutism" was more interesting to him. 

The Parliament of 165 1 was an avowedly Tariff Reform 
Parliament. On October 9th, that is, within six weeks of the 
battle of Worcester, it passed the famous Navigation Act. This 
Act forbade the importation of goods in any but English ships 
or those ships of the country where the goods were made. 
The objects of the Act were three, namely, the protection of 
the shipbuilding industry of the country, the destruction of 
the monopoly possessed by the Dutch in the world's carrying 
trade, and the fostering of the home sea-carrying trade. This, 
of course, precipitated a naval war with the Dutch. 



Cromwell's reasons against the war were both religious 
and financial. Let us hope the policy of selling some of the late 
King's property, divesting the Church of some of hers, and 
appropriating the lands of fallen antagonists, brought some 
slight measure of consolation to him. 



Nominees or Nominators, or 
Power, Power, who shall have it? 

By the end of the year 165 1 it was evident a great amount 
of jealousy existed between Cromwell and the Parliament. 
The latter in 1652 attempted to carry out its principal pro- 
ject, namely, the reduction of the army. Cromwell was equally 
determined to thwart it. He and his officers voted a remon- 
strance to the Parliament for daring to be so impudent, and 
politely hinted that as a Parliament they had sat long enough, 
and the best thing they could do was to dissolve. Parliament 
took the remonstrance in bad part, and by March, 1653, it 
was evident a climax could not be long delayed. 



The Reformers. 

In the State at this time there were three bodies of re- 
formers, each so terribly anxious for the welfare of the nation, 
that they thought it best that each party should be endowed 
with absolute power. The parties were: — 

1. The Parliamentary Party with Sir Harry Vane at its 

head. 

2. The Army, represented by the officers. 

3. Cromwell himself. 
Result : Cromwell won. 



Briefly Vane's plan was, that the members should continue 
to sit and co-opt a certain number of their own friends, whose 
fidelity would be guarantee that they would not betray the 
cause. Oliver soon perceived that this was a simple way of 
perpetuating themselves in office. His idea of a free Govern- 
ment was in a nominated council, with the popular choice com- 
pletely ignored. 

To ascertain if an agreement could be arrived at, a con- 
ference with the leaders was held in Cromwell's rooms in 
Whitehall, April 19th. The meeting was adjourned on the 
understanding that Parliament would not proceed with the 
Bill until another conference had been held. The next morn- 
ing, news was brought to Cromwell that Parliament was 
already at work, and that the Bill was being rammed through 
as quickly as possible, and was on the point of becoming law. 
This was enough for him ; if power were to be retained, now 
was the time to act. He immediately crossed to the House, 
and by the aid of 300 soldiers, and the dropping of pious 
scriptural ejaculations from his lips, he cleared the place, 
locked the door, put the key in his pocket, and went home. 

To Cromwell all due must be given. He with twelve others 
formed themselves into a Council of State. Letters were sent 
to the Independent ministers of the country asking them to 
consult their congregations, and forward names of persons 
suitable to become members, of Parliament. The Council 
selected 128 names from England, 5 from Scotland, and 6 
from Ireland. Thus Ireland, when first sending members to 
the British Parliament, had the honour of being represented by 
six Englishmen, with Henry Cromwell at their head. This 
Parliament, as it voted itself on July 4th, contemplated grand 
legislative measures, but its principal work seems to have been 
the utterance of a plethora of Biblical texts ; however, a blow 
was struck at the Church by requiring all marriages to be per- 



formed before a justice of the peace. It gave Cromwell 
supreme executive and judicial powers, and created for him a 
new High Commission Court, for the trial of offenders where 
it would be unsafe to let the verdict go to a jury. The farce 
ended happily. The members surrendered all power to him. 
They drew up a deed called the " Instrument of Government," 
by which they nominated him ruler with the title of His High- 
ness the Lord Protector, assisted by a Council of twenty-one. 

Oliver's next move was the reform of the Church. This, 
he thought, would best be done by filling the parish pulpits 
with Independent or Presbyterian ministers. Two bodies of 
commissioners were formed, a Commission of Triers consist- 
ing of forty-three members, and a Commission of Ejectors con- 
sisting of about twenty to thirty members in each county, 
assisted by some ten ministers. 

The work of the Triers was to examine prospective pre- 
sentees to all benefices. Cromwell was the most indefatigable 
of workers. At that time nearly half the livings of the country 
were at his own private disposal, et bien qiiHl eiit '& autre s 
chats a fouetter he interviewed each applicant for presenta- 
tion. The work of the Ejectors was to- oust certain ministers, 
who were thought not to be reputable, from their livings, and 
so make work for the other body of commissioners., ■ ! ' 

The religious work of Oliver was most unfortunate. J It 
laid the foundation of that harsh treatment which was inflicted 
on the dissenters, when within the space of ten years the wheel 
of fortune again brought the episcopalians uppermost. As 
regards the Church, Cromwell unwittingly wrought her ah 
inestimable boon. Within a few years of his death she* had 
not only recovered her lost place, but had put herself in such 
a position, that for a space of 240 years the hand of the 
despoiler had been stayed. ■ ' 



Cromwell's First Free Parliament. 

This Parliament met September 3rd, 1654, and was dis- 
solved January 22nd, 1655. By the Instrument of Govern- 
ment the Protector was bound to call a Parliament every three 
years, and allow it to sit for five months without being ad- 
journed, prorogued, or dismissed. It was to consist of 460 
members, 400 for England, 30 for Scotland, and 30 for 
Ireland. That it was not a harmonious assembly was cer- 
tainly not the fault of Cromwell — he did all that it was pos- 
sible to secure a body of 460 sycophantic creatures. No 
Churchman was capable of serving, the lower populace were 
excluded from the elections by restricting the franchise to 
those who possessed an estate of ,£200 or more in value, and 
he and his officers nominated 144 members their own personal 
friends, including themselves. 

Oliver soon found something was wrong with his first Par- 
liament ; it was actually wicked enough to discuss his 
authority. He soon put an end to it. On September 12th 
(when Parliament was nine days old) he ordered the doors to 
be locked, sent for the members and gave them a sweet homily 
— he had received his office from God and the feo-ple, and 
none but God and the feofle would take it from him. 

He allowed them to re-enter the House on condition they 
signed an agreement to be true and faithful to him, in other 
words, to do nothing to oppose his wishes. He dissolved the 
Parliament January 22nd, 1655, that is, after a sitting of five 
lunar months. Some Cromwellian biographers put his mathe- 
matical ratiocinations but on a plane approaching mediocrity. 
This is a great injustice. He could calculate easily that by 
reckoning lunar months instead of calendar months he could 
put an end to the Parliament's existence so much sooner. He 
now ruled without a Parliament until lack of funds compelled 
him to summon another, September 17th, 1656. 



9 
His Ideal of Free Government. 

He divided England into twelve military districts, and over 
each placed a friendly major-general whose duty it was to 
punish disaffected persons. A disaffected person was one 
whose politics and religion differed from the major- general's. 
The disaffected persons were registered like so many bullocks ; 
they could not change their residence without notifying the 
major-general, an ejected minister could not become a teacher nor 
use the prayer book; the liberty of the Press was smothered by 
requiring permission from the Secretary of State before any 
matter could be printed or sold. This policing of the country 
was naturally very expensive. Two questions now fronted 
him, how to get the money to pay for it, and how to get it 
without calling a Parliament. Happy thought ! Why not make 
the delinquents pay? The major-generals were ordered to 
exact one-tenth the incomes of persons who were classed as 
disaffected. This plan waj extremely satisfactory, except to 
those who were forced to pay. 

Want of money eventually compelled him to call another 
Parliament, which met September 17th, 1656, and although 
he used every artifice possible to fill it with creatures subor- 
dinate to his will, he found a majority against him. What to 
do ? Nothing easier ! Why not prevent a sufficient number of 
members from attending in order to secure a majority ? This 
was done. He placed soldiers at the door of the Commons, 
and anyone without a "pass" was refused admittance. The 
ninety-three excluded members protested vigorously against 
this treatment, not only because it was an act of tyranny, but 
because it was done in the name of God and religion. But to 
Cromwell religion (or its simulation) was everything. Of his 
attempt to form a House of Lords to protect himself from the 
Commons nothing need be said. With regard to his desire to 
assume the title of King, probably only the ridicule of his 



IO 

own family was insurmountable. He died September 3rd, 
1658, aged fifty-nine years. 

The same story of plot, counter-plot, and intrigue was con- 
tinued to the end of the chapter. Even in the death chamber 
itself, before his body was yet a corpse, plot was rife as to 
who should seize the sceptre from his weakening grasp. 




I I 



Part II. 

Charles, thou wast never a hypocrite. Thy greatest enemy 
can never truthfully burden thy memory with that fetid 
epithet. It is true that as a ruler thou aimedst at absolutism 
and attainedst it ; for eleven years without a break thou ruledst 
without a Parliament, thus sadly profaning the constitution 
as ordained by Edward III. ; but one must not forget in that 
mortal struggle for supremacy the pretentious claims of the 
Parliament were equally exorbitant and unreasonable. That 
Parliament aimed at absolutism just as much as Charles is 
merely a matter of history. A Bill was introduced by which 
members could perpetuate themselves in office, and on the 
very day that Charles gave his consent to the execution of 
Strafford, May ioth, 164 r, he sanctioned the Bill which de- 
clared that Parliament should not be adjourned, prorogued^ 
or dissolved without its own consent. Of course, Cromwell 
did not rule absolutely for eleven years; he did not " reign " 
five years altogether ; but notwithstanding the fact that he ex- 
cluded his political opponents from all share in the Govern- 
ment (excepting, of course, the privilege of paying extra, 
taxes), he schemed so well that he managed to rule nearly half 
his time without the aid of a Parliament. And Cromwell did 
undoubtedly claim to rule on behalf of God, religion, the 
people and liberty. 

Suffragette Tactics. 

One incident is worth recording, as it shows the method 
adopted towards those who practised suffragette tactics. 
Charles's trial commenced in Westminster Hall on January 
20th, 1649. By some chance or other Fairfax's name was 



J2 

included among the 133 persons who were to compose the 
Court. When the crier called the name " Fairfax " the whole 
assembly was startled to hear a woman's voice cry, "He has 
more wit than to be here." The charge against Charles was 
made " In the name of the people of England." When it was 
read and immediately these words were spoken the same voice 
cried out, "Not a tenth part of them." The brutal Axtell, 
officer of the court (this is the same gentleman who cracked 
low jokes while the soldiers were blowing tobacco smoke in 
Charles's face, when the latter was endeavouring to get the 
Court to listen to him), ordered the soldiers to fire into the 
box from whence the sounds proceeded. The voice was that 
of Lady Fairfax. Truly the effects of chaining one's self to 
a grille or a seat were more hazardous in those days than now. 

Hypocrisy Run Mad. 

Historians are divided in their opinions concerning the part 
that Cromwell played in bringing about the execution of the 
King. Some aver that he was averse to extreme measures, but 
that he was forced on by others. Here the historian is unkind 
to rob him of the chief point in his character, that of stub- 
bornness. 

If Cromwell really used the words attributed to him by the 
historian Guizot (wRo, however, gives his authorities) the part 
he meant to play is clear enough. I have translated his words 
into the vulgar English of to-day. It was noon, the 20th of 
January, 1649, Cromwell and other members of the Court 
were sitting in the painted chamber, when news was brought 
that Charles was being taken to Westminster Hall for trial. 
Cromwell rushed to the window and saw the King being car- 
ried on a sedan between two lines of soldiers. He turned 
round pale and excited and cried: "He's come; he's come; 
now we shall have a chance to distinguish ourselves; mean- 



while, one of you clever ones find an answer to the first question 
Charles will be sure to put, namely : ' What is your authority 
for trying me?' " During the trial Charles begged the Court to 
let him speak, but the soldiers round him caused such a row 
and became so abusive that the place was more like a tap-room 
than a court of justice. One of the members, Colonel Downs, 
could restrain his feelings no longer, but exclaimed : " Have 
we hearts of stone, are we men?" Cromwell, who was sitting 
close by, turned round and said : " What the deuce do vou 
mean, Colonel, are you off your head. Can't you see you're 
giving the whole show away?" At length, January 29th, it 
became necessary for the members to affix their signatures to 
the fatal order of the Court. Cromwell treated it as a huge 
joke. He signed third, and having done so, put his fingers 
in the ink and smeared it over Henry Martin's face, who im- 
mediately reciprocated the graceful act. Perhaps this was 
Cromwell's pretty way of donning mourning garb. 

All honour is due to the Irish Nationalists who some years 
ago (I believe it was during Lord Rosebery's Government) 
refused in Parliament to vote money to erect a statue of the 
Dictator. They probably represented the voice of England 
as well as Ireland. 




1-4 



Part III. 

What have you or I or anyone else not seeking place, power, 
or patronage under the State, to gain by the destruction of 
the Upper Chamber ? Its abolition last time brought a sword 
to Ireland, and it would undoubtedly do so again. Is there a 
governing chamber in the world to-day where its members dare 
express their opinions so freely, and with less trimming and 
pooling of conscience? The people rule, the people must rule, 
but the passion of the people may not be its voice. Second 
thoughts are sometimes best, even with nations. The House 
of Lords, as in times past, is bound to give way under the 
deliberate and considered judgment of the nation. Abolition- 
ists, in your essai ponder the consequences : if your objective 
fail, you will alarmingly ensconce the Coroneted Court in its 
own privileges. 

Take the case of a constitutional Free Trader to-day. He 
desires the present method of government and the maintenance 
of Free Trade. He votes for the latter, and in so doing he 
votes for the manufacture of a legislative system that can 
foist on him a cast-iron Tariff Reform regime without 
troubling to consult him or anyone else. And how can this 
be done, you say. Very easily. With a single chamber the 
constitution could be altered to suit one's convenience every 
twenty-four hours. The most momentous law could be passed 
by resolution and without discussion. Under the present Con- 
stitution, by the Septennial Act of 17 16, Parliament is bound 
to dissolve by the end of the seventh year. With an unbridled 
single chamber, this Act could, by resolution, be changed to 
a Centennial Act; then another little resolution to provide for 
the co-option of new members when Father Senility gently intro- 



duced himself to some of the more patriarchal of the flock — 
you have then a Government responsible to no one but itself. 

Of course, the Office of the Crown would go, too, perhaps 
not so quickly as last time, when it survived the abolition of 
the House of Lords by one day ; but still it would be at the 
mercy of a Parliament elected under a totally different issue: 
perhaps one to inflict dire penalties on the poor farmer who 
allowed the cruel thorns to grow on the hedges to the annoy- 
ance of newly fledged sparrowlets. Some may say in answer 
to all this : " Oh, things are very different now. Georgian 
times are not strictly comparable with Cromwellian times." 
The answer is a very simple one. In Cromwell's time it was 
revolution first and abolition last ; the next time it will be 
abolition first and revolution last. If the Office of the House of 
Lords has grown into desuetude, if the Constitution 
has become effete and unworkable, then produce your 
plan to remedy it, discuss it, send it to the nation, let the 
people be the judge, and if the Fates will it that our form of 
government shall revert to its Cromwellian prototype, a system 
which would undoubtedly let loose upon the community a 
torrential sluice of unparalleled tyranny perpetrated under the 
aegis of some conjured-up chimera, then let us submit, let us 
submit. 



Printed by 
HENRY J. DRANE, 
Farringdon Street, E.C. 



Conservation Resources 
Lie-Free® Type I 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

■mill 

020 702 092 8 f 



